Upgrading from Epic: GR1 vs Film SLR vs Digital?

I have been a happy enough Epic user, but I need a replacement and
while I could just get another Epic, I want to rethink the whole issue
and look at possible upgrades. I see my options as follows:

1. A high end PS like Ricoh GR1.

2. A film SLR, like Pentax *ist recommended in another thread. Or
Canons. Too bad Olympus is out of this business because I like the
company.

3. Digital. This is new territory for me about which I know nothing.

I know you cannot choose for me. However, I would greatly appreciate
adviceor expereinced-based advocacy opinions about the category as well
as specific models, to help me sort it out.

Need: I am no pro, but I have a busy family and travel life. I shoot
everything from deliberate portraits to parties to asian cities. Mostly
4x6 prints but, naturally, some lucky/rare/great shots do tend to get
enlarged.

Convenience: I know I would like just one camera which could travel
with me everywhere. So small and light is a big draw. I should be able
to use it as an auto-everything ps. Beyond that, I welcome the
possibility of cretivity when I have time or resources.

Cost: I can spend a little more now than when I bought the Epic, up to
500 is no problem but of course I am not determined to spend more money
than necessary.

Esoteric considerations: I don't know if it is the right time to jump
into digital? Film is a mature technology, digital could be changing
very fast. I don't change my equipment often, I tend to live with what
I have. Should people like me wait a few years before going digital?

Anyway, all comments appreciated.

 

Your situation sounds similar to mine.

Most of my photography is done while traveling. I realized that I
wasn't enjoying taking pictures because my old SLR and lenses were way
too heavy and bulky to take along and fiddle with (who wants to be
changing lenses while riding in a vaporetto in Venice?) but the P&S
zoom (an older and somewhat bulky Pentax IQZoom) didn't take very good
pictures.

So, as I mentioned in the other thread, I got a Pentax *ist with the
kit lens. It's small, light, and very versatile. I can put it on an
Ultrapod and take long exposures in museums and dark churches where no
flash is permitted. I can play with the settings if I want, or just
leave it on auto.

And incidentally, because sometimes even the *ist is too big, I got an
Olympic Stylus Epic to carry in my shirt pocket, just in case.

The Ricoh looks nice, but sheesh! Seems awfully expensive to me.

 

Me too. Though of course, wouldn't be awfully expensive if compared to a
digital camera, but yet again, with a digital you have little or no running
costs except backup media.

For the OP, I'm replying here instead of the other group.

It somewhat depends on how often you shoot. If you shoot only occasionally then
film is okay. If you plan to shoot often then digital is good as it puts no
cost or delay limits on how much or often you shoot. You can literally shoot
hundreds per day with digital. Though whether you actually do in reality once
you got the camera is another matter, as I got out today to shoot while walking
and only came back with two. It just happens sometimes. But then the other day
i shot over 50 that I was able to view immediately on my return.

If you want to get creative then digital is really good in the sense that you
can shoot as much as you want.

Ideally if travelling, you'd want a portable backup media, one that would allow
you to transfer photos from the card that you use in the camera to a backup
media so you can use the card again to shoot more pictures, this can be either
CD based

http://www.apacer.com/apacer_english/product_html/disc_steno_index.asp

Or a portable hard drive, something similar to the ipod, though not necessarily
the ipod itself. More like this one

http://www.xs-drive.com/xsdrive2/

 

To the OP... those two items I showed you for image backup while travelling
were just examples... Ideally you'd want one that uses AA batteries. This one
does

http://www.card-media.co.uk/digi+magic.htm

 

It is always good to hear from someone in a situation similar to mine.

The used GR1s/v appear to be ~$500, new ones are no longer made. And
other upscale ps's are even more expensive. I was/am prepared to spend
that much, but since good quality SLR's are available new in the same
budget (not an issue when I bought my Epic), they should be considered.

So you have already been through this search. Is *ist the smallest film
slr available? Are you using the 28-80/90 lens? I should go handle one
in a store, so I can get the feeling for size/weight. Is there a simple
way to compare the results you get from the two cameras?